4.8 Review

Reactive p-block cations stabilized by weakly coordinating anions

Journal

CHEMICAL SOCIETY REVIEWS
Volume 45, Issue 4, Pages 789-899

Publisher

ROYAL SOC CHEMISTRY
DOI: 10.1039/c5cs00672d

Keywords

-

Funding

  1. Albert-Ludwigs-Universitat Freiburg
  2. ERC in the grant UniChem
  3. DFG in the Normalverfahren

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The chemistry of the p-block elements is a huge playground for fundamental and applied work. With their bonding from electron deficient to hypercoordinate and formally hypervalent, the p-block elements represent an area to find terra incognita. Often, the formation of cations that contain p-block elements as central ingredient is desired, for example to make a compound more Lewis acidic for an application or simply to prove an idea. This review has collected the reactive p-block cations (rPBC) with a comprehensive focus on those that have been published since the year 2000, but including the milestones and key citations of earlier work. We include an overview on the weakly coordinating anions (WCAs) used to stabilize the rPBC and give an overview to WCA selection, ionization strategies for rPBC-formation and finally list the rPBC ordered in their respective group from 13 to 18. However, typical, often more organic ion classes that constitute for example ionic liquids (imidazolium, ammonium, etc.) were omitted, as were those that do not fulfill the naturally subjective - reactive-criterion of the rPBC. As a rule, we only included rPBC with crystal structure and only rarely refer to important cations published without crystal structure. This collection is intended for those who are simply interested what has been done or what is possible, as well as those who seek advice on preparative issues, up to people having a certain application in mind, where the knowledge on the existence of a rPBC that might play a role as an intermediate or active center may be useful.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.8
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available